(08-09-2015 05:08 PM)Octapulse Wrote: How do you assert with 100% confidence that something cannot be caused by a local agent? Again, just because you don't know of a local cause agent does not mean there cannot be one

If I accept the possibility that all effects have local causes, I must then reject Quantum Mechanics. Bell's theorem proves Quantum Mechanics is not classical as you keep suggesting. Hidden local variables explaining all the prediction of Quantum Mechanics is impossible.

I'm not going to reject Quantum Mechanics without a good reason. It is something that I accept is true. I'm not going to latch on to the silly notion that effects can happen without causes without a good reason. Causality is something that I accept is true.

If there is an effect, than there is an underlying cause. If the cause cannot be local, then it must be non-local. There really isn't another explanation that is plausible. I think I have very good reason to believe in non-local causal agent.

(08-09-2015 03:57 PM)Unbeliever Wrote: Again, "non-local causal agent" is not something that most people would consider a god, and "non-local causal agent which sets everything in motion" is a meaningless non-phrase.

Most people would define God as the first cause. The effects we observe without causes occur at the quantum level....the foundation of our reality where all cause and effect chains begin. In a very real sense when we observe these effects without local causes, we are observing the first cause in a cause and effect chain that comes into existence in our world.

(08-09-2015 05:43 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote: Most people would define God as the first cause. The effects we observe without causes occur at the quantum level....the foundation of our reality where all cause and effect chains begin. In a very real sense when we observe these effects without local causes, we are observing the first cause in a cause and effect chain that comes into existence in our world.

Deepak???

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.

(08-09-2015 05:08 PM)Octapulse Wrote: How do you assert with 100% confidence that something cannot be caused by a local agent? Again, just because you don't know of a local cause agent does not mean there cannot be one

If I accept the possibility that all effects have local causes, I must then reject Quantum Mechanics.

I'm not going to reject Quantum Mechanics without a good reason. It is something that I accept is true. I'm not going to latch on to the silly notion that effects can happen without causes without a good reason. Causality is something that I accept is true.

I think I have very good reason to believe in non-local causal agent.

I never asserted that all causation is local, even if it's not, that doesn't prove a god is responsible.

Your last statement says it all. You think, you do not know. You said yourself that non-local causes cannot be observed. Therefore, the basis of your claim is outside the parameters of scientific process and is one of faith

(22-08-2015 07:30 PM)Revenant77x Wrote: It is by will alone I set my brows in motion it is by the conditioner of avocado that the brows acquire volume the skin acquires spots the spots become a warning. It is by will alone I set my brows in motion.

(08-09-2015 05:43 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote: Most people would define God as the first cause. The effects we observe without causes occur at the quantum level....the foundation of our reality where all cause and effect chains begin. In a very real sense when we observe these effects without local causes, we are observing the first cause in a cause and effect chain that comes into existence in our world.

Deepak???

Someone claimed that "non-local causal agent" is not a common definition of God....but really given the way our world works.....it is the same as one of the most common definitions of God out there.

(08-09-2015 05:50 PM)Octapulse Wrote: Your last statement says it all. You think, you do not know. You said yourself that non-local causes cannot be observed. Therefore, the basis of your claim is outside the parameters of scientific process but rather one of faith.

I think the sun will rise tomorrow too. Is that thought based on faith?

Just because you think something.....just because you have formulated a conclusion in your mind doesn't mean you are embracing something as a matter of faith. As it turns out my conclusions about God's existence are based on observations of the natural world. They are not faith based.

This describes the content of all your posts. I don't know why I bother to respond to you. You're like the male version of Anjele. You're a good cheerleader for atheism but you never actually add anything to the discussion.

This describes the content of all your posts. I don't know why I bother to respond to you. You're like the male version of Anjele. You're a good cheerleader for atheism but you never actually add anything to the discussion.

I am responding to what you write. That you are unable to explain in meaningful language what you mean is not my fault.
Your problem is that you attempt to explain what exists only in your imagination. To you it is real. Of this I have no doubt. But are you here to convince yourself or others?

That I call it out for what it is, meaningless twaddle, is after all to be expected at a rationalist website. Don't you think? This is not a forum of sheep who believe any BS some wannabe guru tells them.

Pick up your game. Or, stop wasting all our time.

Got a better explanation? No?

I wonder why???

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.

(08-09-2015 05:50 PM)Octapulse Wrote: Your last statement says it all. You think, you do not know. You said yourself that non-local causes cannot be observed. Therefore, the basis of your claim is outside the parameters of scientific process but rather one of faith.

I think the sun will rise tomorrow too. Is that thought based on faith?

Just because you think something.....just because you have formulated a conclusion in your mind doesn't mean you are embracing something as a matter of faith. As it turns out my conclusions about God's existence are based on observations of the natural world. They are not faith based.

Well now you are just creating a strawman out of semantics. Most people know the sun will rise tomorrow, and that is because of repetitive observation, but you say you think it will. What observations are you basing your thinkage on?

(22-08-2015 07:30 PM)Revenant77x Wrote: It is by will alone I set my brows in motion it is by the conditioner of avocado that the brows acquire volume the skin acquires spots the spots become a warning. It is by will alone I set my brows in motion.